By Mariana Ottaway & Meredith Riley
The article is basically an argument against the Moroccan monarchy. The author is calling for a constitutional and democratic monarchy, believing that “there is no indication that Morocco is becoming a democratic country.”(3) She puts herself as an authority over the destiny of the Moroccan government, and even goes far to claim that “talk of democratization in Morocco is moot”(3) unless the power of the king is limited. She criticizes the king for being the dominant religious and political authority in Morocco and the main leader of what she calls “the top-down reform” process.
She talks about Hassan II and the four reforms he introduced: improved respect for human rights, a limited increase in the power of parliament, enhanced opportunities for political participation by parties and civil society, and some attempts to curb corruption. And then how these reforms were continued by Mohamed VI. She insists that Morocco needs a constitutional monarchy and then suggests some ways to achieve it, “the first is to enumerate the measures necessary to transform the political system into one that is more democratic” and the second is “to envisage the political process that might lead to the enactment of these measures.”(10) She only assumes that democracy is good, she never gives one reason why democracy should be applied in Morocco or explaining why it is better that a monarchy, she just takes it for granted.
The author seems to be so overwhelmed with the supposedly Western democratic system that she is willing to see it applied everywhere, with no understanding of the culture, civilization, and heritage. She suggests that Morocco needs assistance from the outside primarily “the United States, individual European countries, and the European Union as a whole, to encourage a process leading to democratization.”(4) The author, however, seems to be powerfully reflecting on the Moroccan Monarchy and offering so many “solutions” while she doesn’t even hold a Master’s degree!